loudly praises for his walking in the truth, and for his charity towards the brethren and strangers, and while he strongly animadverts upon the improper conduct of Diotrephes, he yields a most willing and honourable testimony in favour of Demetrius.

THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE.

The efforts of certain heretics to vitiate the belief, whilst they corrupted the morality of such as listened to them, instigated St. Jude to write this epistle. In it that apostle calls upon the brethren "to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints," (verse 3.) and admonishes them that "certain men had secretly entered in, ungodly, turning the grace of our God into riotousness, and denying the only sovereign ruler, and our Lord Jesus Christ." (verse 4.)

THE APOCALYPSE.

The book of the apocalypse or revelations was written in the Island of Patmos, as we gather from the ninth verse of the first chapter, whilst its divinely inspired author was suffering exile. General opinion has fixed its composition about the year 96. Its contents are the revelations made to the apostle by the Holy Spirit, to be communicated by him to the seven Churches of Asia, (verse 11.) not to the universal body of the faithful: they are prophetic of the principal events about to happen in the Church. The sublime ideas-the splendid imagery, that are so conspicuous throughout this portion of the sacred Scriptures-together with the mystic nature of the language which envelopes them, have made it a labyrinth into which many a proud and giant genius has entered only to entangle and to lose itself. Without citing

a multitude of names, the idle interpretations and the reveries of our own illustrious Newton on this book, will be quite sufficient to establish the veracity of this assertion.

APPENDIX.-No. XIII.

FROM THE CATHOLIC MISCELLANY.

Archdeacon Nares says, that the apochryphal books were received neither by Jews nor Christians before the Protestant reformation. This assertion is perpetually in the mouth of Protestants; and in the angry discussions which are now going on relative to this subject, each party has shown how little they know about the question, It may therefore prove acceptable to your readers to be put in possession of what I may call the facts of the case; and for this purpose I shall compress the learned dissertation by the Rev. Mr. Kinsella, of Carlow, to be found in the appendix to his controversial letters.

66

Among the many differences between Catholics and Protestants, one of the most important regards certain portions of Scripture, which the latter refuse to receive as canonical. These parts of the Bible are by them considered as Apocryphal," that is, of uncertain origin, and doubtful authority; while on the other side, the Catholic Church, guided by the testimony of antiquity, and directed by the Spirit of Eternal Truth, delivers these books to her children as the pure word of God. The portions of the Scripture which Catholics admit into the

canon, and which Protestants exclude from it, are as follows: the Book of Wisdom,-the Book of Ecclesiasticus, the History of Tobias,—the History of Judith,-and the first and second book of the Macchabees. To these we must add the latter chapters of Esther, some chapters of Daniel, and the Prophecy of Baruch. According to the sixth of the Thirty-nine Articles, the English Church "doth read these books for example of life and instruction of manners, but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine." The Catholic Church not only orders her children to read them for the instruction of life and manners, but also employs them to establish certain articles of doctrine; which articles, however, can be abundantly proved from other sources.

Christianity, when first established, was subjected to almost incessant persecutions, and its followers were comparatively few in number and widely scattered over the whole world. Under such circumstances each particular Church had scarcely any opportunities of consulting the other Churches, and the reader of ecclesiastical history will perceive that in those things which related to faith, as well as in those which regarded morals, the belief both of the people and the bishops was guided in most cases by the tradition of the particular Church to which they belonged. Now as many portions of the Scripture were addressed only to particular Churches, it is not wonderful that the bishops of other Churches should have remained ignorant of their canonicity; and as there were many writings which appeared scriptural, but which were really apocryphal, it is quite natural that the pastors of particular churches should have held different opinions as to a mere matter of fact: for no one ever asserted that particular bishops, or particular fathers, were incapable of mis

taking a fact that could not be ascertained without considerable difficulty. It appears, therefore, most reasonable, that in determining the matter, we should look rather to the decision of the Fathers when assembled in council, than to their opinions when separated from each other ; for to say nothing of the theological argument in favour of Ecumenical Councils, the principles even of logic demonstrate, that as a motive of judgment, the testimony of individuals is fallible; but the testimony of many men, assembled from different places, and guided by different feelings, is conclusive.

The Council of Laodicea is one of the first that appears to have turned their attention to this subject; for though Jerome seems to say that the Council of Nice approved of one of those books which our adversaries reject, it must be allowed that we have no authentic copy of their decision. The Fathers at Laodicea, in their list of canonical books, included only one of the disputed books of the Old Testament; and Protestants, though on every other occasion they refuse to pay any sort of attention to the decisions of Councils, are particularly fond of quoting the fifty-ninth canon of Laodicea as a most conclusive argument in their favour. I do not, however, see that the argument has any strength; for though the pious canons of this Council have always entitled it to great respect, it was still merely a provincial Council, consisting of a very small number of bishops, and of course could only bear testimony to the tradition of one small province of the Universal Church. Moreover, the Council merely gave a list of those books, the canonicity of which was at that time clearly ascertained; and if it passed over some of those which we receive, it was because their authenticity had not been, at that period, and in that place, finally determined. It is also particu

larly worthy of remark, that though Protestants object this Council to us, they do not seem to think very highly of it themselves; and in point of fact, we pay more respect to its authority than our adversaries are disposed to do, even on this subject. We receive every one of the books mentioned at Laodicea, and if we add to the number, it is because we think that the general tradition was not then sufficiently ascertained. The Protestants reject the Prophecy of Baruch, which this Council inserted in their canon, and they receive the Apocalypse, which the Council refused to admit. This species of inconsistency is, however, very common with our adversaries; for I have remarked, that there is scarcely one ancient authority which they quote, that does not differ from them with regard to some particular books.

The Council of Carthage was held about thirty years after that of Laodicea, and is undoubtedly one of the most respectable that has ever met. The bishops of the great and enlightened Church of Africa were assembled, and Aurelius, the celebrated Archbishop of Carthage, presided. What must add very considerably to the authority of this Council is, that we have every reason to believe that the great and learned Augustine was present; it is, at all events, admitted, that he approved of its proceedings in every respect, and particularly with reference to the canon of the Scripture. When the Fathers assembled at Laodicea, the Church was scarcely recovered from the previous persecution; but when the Council of Carthage was held, she had enjoyed some years of repose, and the different national Churches had availed themselves of the opportunity of comparing their respective traditions: and as the canon of Scripture was a fact that, according to the Protestants themselves, must be decided by the testimony